A week of fieldwork, then a week of typing
A ground investigation wraps up. The engineer on site kept paper logs for twelve window samples and four cable percussion boreholes, with descriptions, sample references, water strikes and in situ tests. The lab's results arrive as a spreadsheet and a PDF. Now someone in the office types the logs into your log production software, cross-references sample numbers with the lab results, fixes the ones that do not match, and produces AGS data for the client.
Typing the logs is slow, and it is also where errors creep in: a depth transposed, a sample reference misread from muddy handwriting, a description abbreviated in a way the next person cannot read.
Why GI data gets handled so many times
- Field logging is on paper or a generic spreadsheet with no structure matching AGS groups.
- Sample numbering is written by hand and does not always match the lab's references.
- Labs return results in their own format, even when they can produce AGS.
- Validation happens only when the AGS file is built, at the end, when errors are hardest to trace.
- Photos of cores and samples are held separately and linked by hand.
Tools such as HoleBASE and gINT are good at producing logs and managing AGS data once it is in. The pain is getting it in cleanly.
What double handling costs
| Step | What goes wrong |
|---|---|
| Typing paper logs | Time, transcription errors, delayed factual report |
| Matching lab samples | Mismatched references, results attached to wrong depths |
| Late AGS validation | Errors found days after the data was entered |
| Photo filing | Core photos hard to find or wrongly labelled |
The factual report is often on the critical path for the design. Every day spent typing is a day the engineers waiting for ground data cannot start.
How we build GI data capture
- A tablet app for the site engineer records each hole's details, strata descriptions, samples, in situ tests and water observations in a structure that maps to AGS groups.
- Descriptions use pick lists for the standard terms your practice uses, with free text where needed, and the engineer stays in charge of the wording.
- Sample references are generated by the app and printed as labels, so the lab receives consistent references.
- Core and sample photos are taken in the app and attached to the hole and depth automatically.
- The app works offline and syncs when signal is available.
- Lab results, in AGS or the lab's spreadsheet format, are imported and matched to samples, with mismatches listed for a person to resolve.
- Data is validated against the AGS format and your own rules as it goes, and exported as AGS for your log production software and for the client.
We work with the log software you already use rather than replacing it. The aim is to hand it clean data.
What changes for the GI team
The site engineer's logs are already digital when they leave site. The office checks rather than types. Lab results slot into the right samples, and the few that do not are listed for someone to sort out.
AGS errors are caught at the point of entry, while the engineer still remembers the hole.
Does this match your GI workflow?
- Paper field logs are typed up in the office.
- Lab sample references regularly fail to match yours.
- AGS validation errors appear at the end.
- Core photos are filed by hand.
- Factual reports are held up by data entry.